Delist a game

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description explains the specific behavioral outcomes: the public page 404s, the game disappears from search and the sitemap, and the record, votes, and comments are retained. This clarifies exactly what 'destructive' means and, importantly, what is not destroyed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is three compact sentences with no filler. The core behavior is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the follow-up sentences efficiently add the public-facing consequences and the alternative-tool guidance.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a single-parameter mutation tool with a destructive hint, the description covers the public effect, the preservation of underlying data, and the relationship to delete_game. Nothing essential for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema fully documents the single parameter, including that it accepts a slug or a uuid. The tool description does not add parameter-specific detail, so the schema carries the weight; the baseline applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific action ('Retires a game from the public site'), the exact resource, and the resulting observable behavior: the page 404s, leaves search, and leaves the sitemap. It also distinguishes itself from delete_game, so an agent can differentiate the tool without opening the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly says to use this tool rather than delete_game for anything that has been live. That is a clear when-to-use instruction and identifies the main alternative. It also implies that delete_game is for cases where delisting is not appropriate, giving useful decision guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.